This is a continuation of our first page of tweets to Stop #HJResolution69. If you have not sent off the first set of tweets they can be located here. Between the two sheets, we have 352 tweets.

For ease of tweeting follow these instructions: Close your twitter window and open this post on your browser, do not tweet from the facebook app. Tap “Tweet4Wolves” at the end of each message and your tweet will be automatically sent. For those of you experiencing trouble with the automatic return to sheet after each tweet, please know that I have done everything possible on this website to correct this problem. This is a difficult task as I am experiencing no trouble sending tweets on my browser (chrome). I have isolated the tweet message which should make it easier for those of you reduced to ‘cut and paste’ tweets. Feel free to add images to the tweets except where noted. Adding images as a link removes 23 characters from the message, adding images when you post your tweet removes zero characters, so I will leave that to you. Help yourself to any images here or from the Facebook event. Thank you for participating.

For ease of tweeting followtheseinstructions: Close your twitter window (not account). Open this post on your browser. Tap “Tweet4Wolves” at the end of each message and your tweet will be automatically sent. Do not tweet from the facebook app!

House lawmakers, on Thursday, February 16th, passed a measure to repeal a recently implemented rule that banned abhorrent practices such as shooting/ trapping wolves while at dens with pups, killing hibernating bears and spotting Grizzlies from aircraft for kill upon landing. The rule aligns with a similar National Park Service rule, which was finalized in October, 2015, banning abhorrent practices such as “bear baiting” and the Game Boards liberal predator control “management”.

The legislation, authored by Representative Don Young, would undo the Alaska National Wildlife Refuges Rule, opening the door for the state to resume aggressive predator control tactics including shooting wolves from airplanes, spotting bears from aircraft for kill upon landing, and killing cubs and pups in their dens on more than 76 million acres of national wildlife refuge land inAlaska. A recently introduced companion measure(S.J.Resolution 18), sponsored by Senator Dan Sullivan, also seeks to erode federal management authority over Alaska Wildlife Refuges and should be set aside.

Undertherule,issued August 3rd, 2016, by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, predator control is not allowed on Alaska’s 16 national wildlife refuges “unlessitisdeterminedtobenecessarytomeetrefugepurposes, isconsistentwithfederallawsandpolicyandisbasedonsoundscienceinresponsetoaconservationconcern.” The law also bans specific hunting methods on Alaska refuges, including killing bear cubs or adult females with cubs, baiting brown bears, taking bears using snares and traps, and aerial shooting of bears and wolves.

The rule “clarifies how existing mandates for the conservation of natural and biological diversity, biological integrity, and environmental health on refuges in Alaska relate to predator control; prohibits several particularly effective methods and means for take of predators”. The rule formally established a goal of biodiversity as the guiding principle of federal management of wildlife refuges. The rule also made it clear there would be no impact on subsistence hunters.

Inablogpostpublished the day of the final ruling in August, former FWS Director Dan Ashe said that in implementing Alaska’s Intensive Management Law, the AlaskaBoardofGame had “unleashed a withering attack on bears and wolves that is wholly at odds with America’s long tradition of ethical, sportsmanlike, fair-chase hunting.”

Under Title VIII (Subsistence Management And Use) of the Alaska National Interests Lands Conservation Act (ANILCA), Alaska Natives and other rural residents were granted hunting and fishing rights (when fish and game are not under outside threat) on National Preserves. The ANILCA did not, however, allow Alaska to manage its wildlife as it has been ~ which is not unlike a game farm, where wolves and bears are decimated to allow unchecked trophy hunting and commercial guiding, and led to the implementation of tighter restrictions by the National Park Service. Alaska is unique among the 50 states for allowing sport and subsistence hunting in the 17 million acres of national preserves added to the National Park System by the ANILCA. While Congress recognized the “important value of subsistence and (sadly) sport hunting”, it allowed both to take place only where consistent with the mandate to protect and conserve wildlife resources. State sport hunting regulations passed by the Alaska Board of Game apply on public lands, but only when those regulations do not conflict with federal mandates or National Park policies.

(In Alaska, the wildlife law known as the IntensiveManagementstatute is in conflict with federal laws governing national park lands and the management of wildlife on those lands. Preemption, the constitutional doctrine which holds that whenfederal law and state law conflict, federal law must be followed, and state law must yield, requires the State of Alaska to refrain from implementing the Intensive Management statute on national park lands because of the conflict with federal laws.)

The Board, however, noticeably became increasingly aggressive in its efforts to implement predator control on federal public lands through liberalization of sport hunting and trapping regulations. For example in 1994, the Alaska Legislature passed the Intensive Management Statute with which the explicit goal was to maintain, restore, or increase the abundance of big game populations for human consumptive use.

The following 2 maps illustrate the enormous expansion of state designated predator control areas (PCA) from 2001 to 2014. The maps also show that the boundaries of most national preserves had been encroached upon and many had become virtually surrounded by Predator Control Areas in just 14 years. Note the vast increase of “wolf control” areas (in yellow).

The Board has also practiced intensive management by liberalizing sport hunting regulations, including:

•Increasing bag limits from five per season up to 20 per season or 10 per day (as high as 20 a day for wolves in some areas of the state), and liberalizing hunting seasons for predators to increase their “harvest”.

•Eliminating the need for hunters to obtain or purchase hunting tags or permits for predators.

•Permitting the incidental taking of predators.

•Authorizing same-day airborne hunting and trapping, which allows hunters to take predators the same day they’ve been flying.

•Allowing the use of bait to lure predators.

•And, of course, the aerial gunning of wolves.

Note that in 2011, the Board issued an emergency order to extend wolf hunting and trapping seasons in GMUs 9 and 10 to increase caribou numbers and as a way of getting around the U.S. Fish & Wildlife’s prohibition on aerial wolf control programs on Unimak Island.

Furthermore, the board has repeatedly refused to reduce the impact of its programs on NationalPreserves. For example, in the spring of 2014, the radio-collared Lost Creek wolf pack left the borders of the Yukon-Charley Rivers National Preserve and was eliminated through aerial shooting by state agents implementing one of the Board’s intensive management plans. The Park Service had been studying the Lost Creek pack for seven years as part of a roughly 20-year study of wolves in the Yukon Charley National Preserve; The State predator control efforts killed 36 wolves in the area in a single year, reducing the preserve’s population by over half.

Another example is the Board’s 2010 elimination of the 122 square-mile buffer adjacent to DenaliNationalPark that protected wolves crossing its boundaries from hunting and trapping~Two years later, the wolf populations in the Park were the lowest in decades.

The USFWS acted admirably to prevent application of state regulations which are incompatible with management objectives for the nearly 77 million acres of wildlife refuges across the state.

The National Park Service has also been at odds with the State which led to the implementation of tighter restrictions on sport hunting (the closure regulations became effective Nov. 23 2015, and new hunting regulations effective January 1, 2016. More information regarding the NPS regulations can be found here.

When H.J. Resolution69 is brought to the floor for a vote, I ask that you please stand by our wildlife and Public Lands, vote against this disgraceful and appalling attempt to reinstate animalcruelty on our wildlife refuges. The companion measure introduced in the Senate is equally shameful in its attempt to undo The Alaska National Wildlife Refuges Rule and should be voted down; the states do not have a right to dictate what happens on our National Wildlife Refuges.

Related content:

Fish and Wildlife Service Wise to Oppose Alaska’s War on Wolves Amustread op-ed by Vic Van Ballenberghe who is a wildlife biologist and a former member of the Alaska Board of Game.

In Paris last December, the world turned a major corner on climate change. Some 195 nations agreed on the urgency of the threat. They also agreed to take steps to combat it, including promoting forest protection and reforestation — steps that are necessary, though not in themselves sufficient, if we are to avoid consequences as extreme for our economies and health as they are for the environment.

In the Tongass rainforest, the Forest Service has clung to the old-school logging of some of the most biologically rich, scenically stunning and carbon-dense forests on Earth.

So it was a surprise to see the U.S. Forest Service — as if in a time warp — recently working counter to that approach in the vast Tongass National Forest of southeast Alaska. There, the agency plans to continue liquidating carbon-laden old growth for at least another decade and a half.

Forest conservation is only one corner in the race to stem climate disruption that the Paris agreement, though broadly encouraging, did not get us far enough around. But it’s a vital one. As Secretary of State John Kerry said recently, deforestation generates nearly a quarter of all the world’s greenhouse gas emissions.

The science is clear: If we want to keep global warming from threatening the existence of coastal areas and low-lying island nations, the world must preserve its remaining old forests and the massive carbon reserves they’ve accumulated over the centuries. The new wood we use has to come instead from sustainably managed plantations and young stands that quickly regrow and recapture the carbon they lose to logging.

Mostly, our federally managed national forests have made that change over the past 25 years. But in the wilds of Alaska, it’s a different story. In the Tongass rainforest, the Forest Service has clung to the old-school logging of some of the most biologically rich, scenically stunning and carbon-dense forests on Earth.

The 17-million-acre Tongass absorbs about 8 percent of the nation’s carbon dioxide pollution from the atmosphere every year. It also teems with extraordinary wildlife, including bears, eagles, wolves and salmon.

Six years ago, Secretary of Agriculture Tom Vilsack decided that enough was enough. He announced a transition away from further logging of Tongass old growth, with the Forest Service “rapidly” implementing this change. This was met with high praise from the public and from scientists like me, but at the agency level, his initiative stalled. The Forest Service went years with no visible progress on the transition, while approving continued clear-cutting of America’s last great rainforest.

This fall, the agency released its final “transition” proposal: 16 more years of old-growth clear-cutting, and maybe more. According to one analysis, the logging proposed under the agency’s plan would release carbon dioxide emissions equivalent to about 4 million additional vehicles annually.

The agency says that neither it, nor the timber industry, can move any faster. In the Pacific Northwest, however, both transitioned to logging young forests almost overnight when courts halted access to old growth. The agency asserts that young Tongass trees growing on old clear-cuts are not yet big enough to log. In fact, though, they are older and larger than the ones that local Native corporation loggers cut and sell abroad, and small local mills say they would be happy to process these trees locally, if they could get them from the agency.

Keeping global warming below catastrophic levels is not something that can wait until we finally get around to it. We need to be doing everything we can right now. We can’t afford to spend another 16 years or more liquidating Tongass old growth and losing the carbon reserves it stores. And we certainly shouldn’t signal other countries that the vital business of saving their carbon-rich rainforests can wait for decades.

The Forest Service can and must move much faster and not undermine U.S. progress and leadership on climate change by protecting these biologically rich and most scenically stunning and carbon dense forests on Earth. It is long past the time to take the country’s biggest carbon asset off the chopping block.

Thomas E. Lovejoy

Thomas Lovejoy is a professor of Environmental Science and Policy at George Mason University and previously a senior environmental advisor to the World Bank and the United Nations Foundation.

Alaska’s Tongass National Forest is nothing short of magical: it contains centuries-old trees and one-of-a-kind wilderness, home to animals like Alexander Archipelago wolves and bald eagles. Your voice is needed to pressure Congress to defund this clearcutting plan and save the Tongass for our children and grandchildren.

Please sign and share this petition from the Sierra Club. Help protect the Tongass National Forest: Stop the Clearcutting. Thank you.

​Livestock grazing is promoted, protected and subsidized by federal agencies on approximately 270 million acres of public land in the 11 western states. By destroying vegetation, damaging wildlife habitats and disrupting natural processes, livestock grazing wreaks ecological havoc on riparian areas, rivers, deserts, grasslands and forests alike — causing significant harm to species and the ecosystems on which theydepend.

“Conservation can be defined as the wise use of our natural environment: it is, in the final analysis, the highest form of national thrift—the prevention of waste and despoilment while preserving, improving and renewing the quality and usefulness of all our resources.”

President John F. Kennedy Conservation Message to Congress (1962)

Presently, Bridger-Teton National Forest permits allow more than 7,000 sheep and 15,000 cattle to graze public land in the Upper Green. The environmental planning document from the Forest Service, which would allow grazing in the area to continue for years to come, proposes to renew livestock grazing permits on 266 square miles of public forestland near the Upper Green River has been released to the public.
The USDA Forest Service’s preferred plan calls for retaining grazing rights on all the acreage that is grazed today and slightly reducing the number of livestock allowed to 8,772 cow-calf pairs and yearling cattle. The Bridger-Teton’s proposal (alternative 3) which would reduce the authorized grazing season on four of six allotments, and add 7 miles of fence line is still a nightmare for wolves, grizzlies, the ecosystem and other wildlife.

Hardly an environmentally friendly plan.

Take a moment to comment against plans for the future of the massive grazing allotment complex, which is also primewolfandgrizzlyhabitat. The complex spans the entire* Bridger-Teton National Forest from north to south, spills into the Gros Ventre River drainage, and is an environmental disaster.

The Forest Service makes the outrageous claim that their proposal is a “livestock grazing strategy designed to maintain existing rangeland and riparian conditions where they meet desired conditions and improve rangeland and riparian conditions in areas of concern.”

The Upper Green rangeland is the most concentrated area for grizzly bear conflict in the entire Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem. A year ago, 80 livestock were confirmed killed by the large carnivores, and five chronically depredating grizzlies were captured and killed in return. Numerous wolves have also been removed for the crime of consumption of the “wrong ungulate”.

Beyond the Fish and Wildlife-directed guidelines, the Bridger-Teton’s plan introduces nonewrequirednonlethaltechniques to stem grizzly-cattle conflict. Forest planners hope to finalize the document before the next grazing season, by which time grizzly bears may be managed by Wyoming.

Three other alternatives are included in the Bridger-Teton’s lengthy planning document.

One option would take “no action” and allow no livestock on the rangeland, and another would continue the grazing regime as it occurs today. A fourth alternative focuses on reducing damage to riparian areas from cattle grazing.

CommentsontheBridger–Teton’sdraftplans for the Upper Green rangeland areduebyNovember 21st. More information can be found here.

*The 323-square-mile public lands rangeland complex in the Upper Green is the largest grazing allotment in the U.S. Forest Service system. The draft plan includes grazing permits on 266 square miles of this area.
*The allotments are the site of about 40 bear-livestock conflicts a year, according to Forest Service documents.

Before September 23rd 2014, when the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia ruled against the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s (USFWS) delisting of wolves in Wyoming, life for a wolf was miserable, designated and “managed” as Trophy Game Animals in the Northwest
(just $18 for Wyoming residents to ‘bag their trophy”). In the rest of Wyoming, designated as Predatory Animals subject to an on-sight shooting policy, killed by any means, at any time, without a license. Should wolves lose their protected status in Wyoming, the species will be subject to this sort of mismanagement within the Bridger-Teton National Forest.

The Forest Service allows people to enter into a publicly owned national forest to kill wolves, often without restrictions. Wildlife is one of the five purposes of the national forests under the Multiple Use Sustained Yield Act, and the Forest Service is obligated to manage for healthy, viable populations of wildlife under the National Forest Management Act and the agency’s own regulations.

Please take a few moments of your time to comment against livestock grazing in the Bridger-Teton National Forest. Eliminating livestock grazing on this enormous allotment might possibly do more for grizzly bears and wolves than any other area in Wyoming.

Please select Alternative One ~ NoLivestockGrazing. Under alternative one, livestock would no longer be permitted to graze in the six allotments on the Upper Green River project area. Livestock grazing would be eliminated and current term grazing permits would be cancelled. Livestock grazing would cease two years after notice of cancellation.

• It is impossible to produce livestock in the west without a multitude of negative impacts including soil erosion and compaction, water pollution, the spread of invasive weeds, spread of disease from domestic animals to wildlife, changes in plant community structure, interruption of natural nutrient cycles, disruption of natural fire regimes, degradation of riparian zones (the majority of riparian areas on public lands are not what hydrologist’s term “proper functioning condition”).

• With livestock comes the removal of predators like wolves and grizzlies.

• With livestock comes the removal of “pests” such as prairie dogs, a competitor of livestock, which were reduced in population to less than 1 percent of their estimated pre-19th century numbers. Because prairie dogs share dependencies with approximately 200 other wildlife species of the prairie ecosystem, their decimation led to drastic declines in the populations of these other animals. Among them, none had been more adversely affected than the black-footed ferret. Once numbering in the tens of millions, by 1986 the species had dwindled to only 18 free-living individuals.

• The degradation and domestication of our public lands with fencing, water tanks, pipelines, and other infrastructure designed to make our public lands better “stock yards” for the benefit of the few ~ public lands ranchers. Livestock grazing infrastructure, commonly bought and paid for by the American tax-payer, has quite literally tamed the once wild West. Hundreds of thousands of miles of fencing on public lands have obstructed natural wildlife movement the migration of native ungulates, which can lead to death during times of environmental stress, such as droughts and blizzards.
Water developments built to facilitate livestock use of public lands have dewatered springs, seeps, and streams which serve as critical habitats for a variety of wildlife across the West.

• There are very few places in the West where native ungulates like bighorn sheep, deer, and elk are at their true biological carrying capacity because the bulk of forage is allotted to domestic livestock. Overgrazing by cattle can literally extirpate native vegetation. In one study, scientists found that domestic livestock grazing consumed 88.8 percent of the available forage. Fewer elk, deer, pronghorn antelope, bighorn, and even bison, means that is that much less prey is available to sustain wolves, and other top predators.

• In the United States, livestock grazing has contributed to the listing of 22 percent of federal threatened and endangered species—almost equal to logging (12 percent) and mining (11 percent) combined. Nationwide, livestock grazing is the 4th major cause of species endangerment and the 2nd major cause of endangerment of plant species. No other human activity in the West is as responsible for the decline or loss of species as is livestock production.

[COPYRIGHT Intheshadowofthewolf, name and webpage]. All Rights Reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced or distributed in any form or by any means, or stored in a database or retrieval system, without the prior written permission of the publisher.

As this is a continuation of my previous post, I will spare you the introduction. If you are not familiar with the situation with this family of wolves in Washington State please visit my previous blog post here.

Our emergency and last minute Tweetstorm begins at noon PDT September 1st; tweets may be sent off as often as you like thereafter. Feel free to use any of the graphics from our Facebook page @intheshadowofthewolf.

As always, a warm welcome and thank you for participating. As usual, all tweets can be automatically sent by tapping “Tweet4Wolves” at the end of each tweet. For ease of tweeting, open this link on your browser and close your twitter window.

The U.S. Forest Service is seeking public comment on a proposed timber sale on Wrangell Island, which is in the Alexander Archipelago in the Alaska Panhandle of southeastern Alaska. The island is just 30 miles long and 5 to 14 miles wide, contains an abundance of wildlife and is separated from the mainland by the Blake Channel.

The Forest Service released five alternatives in their draft environmental impact statement for the Wrangell Island Project on June 2nd. Its preferred alternative would allow two thirds of the acreage to be selectively harvested and a third clear cut, producing about 65 million board feet, and could build up to 17 miles of new national forest roads, some of which will stay open to the public and about 15 miles of temporary roads. The earliest timber sale would be mid to late summer 2017, and targets the largest, highest-value tree stands, which are generally the areas that are also most ecologically important to the forest and wildlife that live there. It seems that, once again, the Forest Service has disregarded the evidence of the probable impacts of its timber program on wolves, other wildlife populations, salmon, and critical habitat necessary for their survival.
The five alternatives range from about 43 million board feet to 65 million or no timber sale at all.

Buck Lindekugel, an attorney for the Southeast Alaska Conservation Council (SEACC), said “Instead of cutting the rest of the old growth that supports a whole variety of uses on Wrangell Island, the Forest Service ought to look at ways of integrating stewardship, restoration activities and supplying timber off the existing road system to the small mills in the area.”

17 miles of new national forest roads!
Already wolf hunting is rife on Wrangell Island with “bag limits” of 5 wolves and portions of the island are subject to Alaska’s infamous “intensive predator management program” encouraging even further reduction of the wolf population. As we have seen on Prince of Wales, logging and roads initiate many harmful effects, including the “overharvest”, ie. poaching, of wolves.

The time has come for Southeast Alaska to no longer rely on the timber industry as an economic driver. The Forest Service should manage the National Forests in Southeast Alaska for a host of public values that support the tourism and fishing economy of today; the driving economic forces are, and continue to be, tourism and recreation.

In your own words, please comment against the proposed Wrangell Timber Sale. Tell the Forest Service that you support “Alternative 1 – which is the “no-action” alternative because in this alternative, none of the proposed activities would occur. Only approved forest management activities not related to the proposed project can and would continue, and road management would be based on the already existing access and travel management plan for Wrangell Island.

*COMMENTS SHOULD BE RECEIVED NO LATER THAN JULY 18, 2016. Comments, including anonymous comments, will be accepted at any time. However, comments posted after the close of the designated comment period (July 18th) may not be able to be given full consideration.

The Tongass offers the country’s largest remaining swath of ancient forest, as well as an estimated one third of the world’s remaining temperate rainforest. It is far past time for an end to old-growth logging and destruction of habitat essential for endemic species found only in this biologically rich region.

Two Political Trainwrecks in the Making.

And they’re off! Last week, the House and Senate Appropriations Committees finished work on their respective versions of the federal spending bill that funds the Department of the Interior, the EPA and the U.S. Forest Service. Both bills are loaded with ideological riders that would block or eliminate protections for our air, water, climate, public health, endangered species, forests and other public lands.

A rider is a provision that either makes a change in law directly or, more commonly, prohibits an agency from using its funds to carry out specific duties under a law or rule. One example would be a rider that prevents the EPA from setting or enforcing limits on air pollution from power plants. Another rider might stop the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service from protecting certain creatures as endangered under the Endangered Species Act.

The House Appropriations Committee imbedded nearly 40 anti-environmental riders into its spending bill before it was voted out of the committee on June 15. It now includes riders that would remove Endangered Species Act protections from wolves in Wyoming and the upper Midwest and deny farmworkers the right to grant a family member, physician or labor representative access to information on pesticides they have been exposed to. Riders in the bill would also block new national monument designations, the president’s Clean Power Plan to reduce carbon pollution from power plants and the Clean Water Rule that protects the drinking water of one in three Americans. In addition, riders in the bill seek to stop the implementation of a 2015 rule to reduce smog nationwide, as well as an effort by the Department of the Interior to control air pollution from offshore oil development.

The Senate Appropriations Committee passed its spending bill on June 16. It too contains more than a dozen anti-environmental riders. It has riders that seek to undermine public involvement and environmental impact analysis of logging projects in national forests. Its riders would also prevent the Obama administration from reducing old-growth logging in Alaska’s Tongass National Forest. Also included are riders to stop the Department of the Interior’s work on a rule to protect streams from mountaintop removal coal mining and to keep mining companies from having to foot the bill for the future hazardous waste contamination that they cause. The bill, with its riders, would also prevent the government from carrying out endangered species protections for the lesser prairie chicken, and it contains the wolf delisting and Clean Water Rule riders as well.

As they left for their July 4th recess House leadership said they intended to bring this spending bill to the House floor early next month, where even more bad riders are likely to be added. It is doubtful the Senate can bring its bill to the floor before the fiscal year ends on September 30. However, all of these poison pill riders will be poised to be part of the year-end, back-room mudwrestling that will occur after the November elections when Congress tries pass a single measure to fund the government.

Between now and then it’s vital that our elected officials understand the American public does not support these back-door assaults on our air, water, climate, workers, wildlife and public lands. The job of Congress is to fund the government, not craft sweetheart riders for polluters.

Tell your elected officials that you are opposed to riders that would remove protections from wolves, block or eliminate protections for our air, water, climate, public health, endangered species, forests and other public lands.

H.R. 2406 (The SHARE Act) is related to the Sportsmen’s Act (S.405, S.659, S.556) in the Senate, but contains several different provisions.

Bill Description (scroll down for tweets as well as a simple cut and paste email to send to your Senators and President Obama):

This omnibus bill combines many bad bills related to environmental resources into one. There are several problematic portions with dire implications for wildlife and the ecosystems they need to thrive. This is Congress at its worst: pandering to special interests and sacrificing smart conservation policy for political cache (adding insult to injury, the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) estimates that enacting this foul piece of legislation would cost $24 million over the 2016-2020 period and $1 million after 2020, assuming appropriation of the authorized and necessary amounts).

One portion of H.R. 2406 would make it impossible for the Department of the Interior or the Department of Agriculture to consider the effects of any “chemical substance” in pistol, revolver, firearm, shell, cartridge, or sport fishing equipment, as outlined in the Toxic Substances Control Act. This bill would prevent federal agencies, and the scientists that work for them, from carrying out their duty to evaluate and protect the public and the environment from toxic substances. This is particularly relevant to our fight to eliminate lead from hunting equipment, because of its deadly effects on wildlife that ingest it. Federal agencies must retain the ability to make decisions based solely on the best available science, not guided by an uncalled for and unscientific bill.

Another section would allow the importation of 41 polar bear sport trophies from Canada. Between the proposal to list polar bears as threatened in 2006 and the final threatened listing in 2008, 41 hunters killed polar bears – despite repeated warnings from hunting organizations and government agencies that trophy imports would likely not be allowed as of the listing date. If Congress passes this new waiver on sport trophies and allows these hunters to import their kills, it would be rewarding their risky and ecologically unsound behavior. It would also set a precedent for Congressional leniency on the import of animals being considered for threatened or endangered listing, which could accelerate the pace of killing for any species proposed for listing in the future.

One of the most devastating provisions contains several alarming rollbacks of long-standing federal environmental and public land laws including the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), the Wilderness Act, and the National Forest Management Act. In the process, it reduces or eliminates important protections for America’s public lands that have been in place for decades. For example, the bill would including trapping under the definition of hunting, conflating two entirely different activities and thereby opening hundreds of millions of public lands to cruel trapping. In addition, the bill would force land managers to prioritize hunting and trapping above other outdoor activities, effectively excluding a large proportion of the American public from enjoying national spaces that belong to all of us. This and other changes in H.R. 2406 are in direct conflict with the stated purpose of the Wilderness Act, which is to establish areas “where the earth and its community of life are untrammeled by man, where man himself is a visitor who does not remain.”

The African Elephant Conservation and Legal Ivory Possession Act, rolled into H.R. 2406, would halt efforts by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) to crack down on the illegal ivory trade, particularly by undoing the restrictions on U.S. ivory imports and exports. African elephants are facing the greatest poaching crisis since the 1980s: more than 100,000 were killed from 2010 to 2012 – an average of one every 15 minutes. The appalling scale of poaching is intertwined with violent militias, organized crime, and government corruption in Africa. A crucial element of halting this ongoing slaughter is addressing the demand for ivory within our own borders. The regulations proposed by the FWS prohibit most imports and exports, and limit other commercial actions to ivory that was lawfully imported prior to 1990 (the date that elephants’ endangered status was elevated by the Convention on the International Trade of Endangered Species). Prohibiting FWS from implementing these vital regulations would be an enormous step backward in the U.S.’s response to the wildlife trafficking crisis.

Other provisions in this huge bill would prevent the public from having a say in National Wildlife Refuge decisions, and waive important environmental reviews for this system as well. Such blind dedication to implementing recreational killing is detrimental to both conservation efforts and the public interest. As of Friday, February 26th, two additional, extremely troubling, amendments were voted on favorably and included in the SHARE Act. One, from Representative Don Young, which would roll back new federal rules on hunting predators on Alaska’s national preserves, and a similar proposed rule for refuges (National Park Service). The federal government wants the new rules to protect wolf and bear populations, while the state wants to control predator numbers to allow for more moose and caribou. The other added amendment would strip wolves of their federal protections in four states under the Endangered Species Act, subverting the judicial process and subjecting hundreds of wolves to hostile state practices such as baiting, hound hunting, and painful steel-jawed leghold traps. This amendment was offered by Congressman Reid Ribble.

As this bill has passed the house with a final vote of 242 ayes to 161 nays the following tweets will be directed to the upper branch of Congress. For those of you who are new to my tweetstorms, all tweets are “click to tweet” just tap “Tweet4Wolves”. For ease of tweeting please open this blog on your browser and close your twitter window. In advance, thankyou for your time and support~In the shadow of the wolf.

*Legislative action may be occurring on S.659 in lieu of or in parallel to action on this bill. Please find a list of tweets against this legislation here, where you will also find a list of all U.S. Senators twitter handles, should you care to send a personalized tweet.

Please oppose H.R. 2406 SHARE Act. The SHARE ACT (Sportsmen’s Heritage and Recreational Enhancement Act, the House version of the Senate’s Bipartisan Sportsmen’s Act) is comprised of numerous, irresponsible, pro-hunting and anti-environment regulations, and represents a clear assault on wildlife with (as of Friday, February 26th) two additional, extremely troubling, amendments. One, from Representative Don Young, which would roll back new federal rules on hunting predators on Alaska’s national preserves, and a similar proposed rule for refuges (National Park Service). This amendment would override a proposed rule from FWS which “clarifies how existing mandates for the conservation of natural and biological diversity, biological integrity, and environmental health on refuges in Alaska relate to predator control; prohibits several particularly effective methods and means for take of predators”. This would formally establish a goal of biodiversity as the guiding principle of federal management of wildlife refuges (The Fish and Wildlife Service says the rule makes clear it would have no impact on subsistence hunters). The amendment, would allow Alaska to continue intensive predator management to allow for more moose and caribou turning our wildlife preserves into game farms.
The other added amendment would strip wolves of their federal protections in four states under the Endangered Species Act, subverting the judicial process and subjecting hundreds of wolves to hostile state practices such as baiting, hound hunting, and painful steel-jawed leghold traps. This amendment was offered by Congressman Reid Ribble.

This omnibus bill combines many bad bills related to environmental resources into one, and contains numerous problematic portions with dire implications for wildlife and the ecosystems they need in order to thrive. This bill panders to special interests and sacrifices smart conservation policy for political cache. H.R. 2406 would prevent the Environmental Protection Agency, the Department of the Interior, and the Department of Agriculture from regulating lead (a potent and dangerous neurotoxin) in fishing tackle and ammunition (An estimated 10-20 million animals die from lead poisoning each year in the United States after ingesting lead shot, bullet fragments, and sport fishing waste). *It would define trapping (outlawed in nearly 90 countries as barbaric, cruel, and inhumane) as a form of hunting which would open up more federal lands to the setting of steel-jaw leghold traps and other body-gripping traps that pose grave risks to public safety, wildlife, endangered species and pets. *This bill would declare that millions of acres of public lands are automatically open to hunting and trapping without any scrutiny. Public land managers seeking to disallow these activities in order to protect wildlife, habitat, and the public would face enormous bureaucratic hurdles. *The SHARE Act would compel the National Park Service to allow private hunters to shoot bison in the Grand Canyon National Park as part of its management plan. These are just several of the horrific provisions of this bill, which would destroy years of work done by animal protection advocates, environmentalists, and conservationists to protect endangered species and other wildlife. Other provisions in this huge bill would prevent the public from having a say in National Wildlife Refuge decisions, and waive important environmental reviews for this system as well. Such blind dedication to implementing recreational killing is detrimental to both conservation efforts and goes against the wishes of the majority of Americans, and their desire to protect the wilderness and wildlife. This is a disgraceful bill which I ask that you set aside permanently.

Thankyou for your time and consideration of this extremely important matter,

Your name

Thankyou for being a voice for the voiceless. Please feel free to send off these tweets as often as you like until these horrible proposals are dismissed.

Due to a pathetically small amount of people attending this event, I did not prepare an extensive tweet sheet. With 100 senators to message (a minimum of 10 tweets to each) this would have been a very time consuming and arduous process, not to mention, quite possibly, the longest tweetstorm in history. It is a bit discouraging to see that well under 100 of the 4,700 friends of the page are willing to make this effort; therefore I offer you this bit of a tweet drizzle (for those of you who are new to my tweetstorms, all tweets are “click to tweet” just tap “Tweet4Wolves”). For ease of tweeting please open this blog on your browser and close your twitter window.

1. #S659 If Congress caves in 2 the trophy-hunting lobby & passes this scam of a bill, we call upon @POTUS to give it a clean kill shot. Tweet4Wolves

Below you will find the exact same automated tweets, none of which have handles, followed by a list of all U.S. Senators twitter handles. Simply cut and paste your Senators handles and attach to tweet. May I suggest posting a comment to your Senator’s facebook page as well. Feel free to use the images (which can be found at the end of this blog) with your tweets, where space allows (images use 23 of the 140 characters allowed).

My apologies to the devoted true activists that have given up much of their time and energy and helped with the causes which I have shared. A heartfelt thanks to these special few.

1. #S659 blocks @USFWS from making decisions about cruel/inhumane predator control on Alaska’s national wildlife refuges. Add handle and tweet (22 characters remaining)

2. #S659 strips #wolves of their federal protections in 4 states under the #ESA among other harmful provisions. Add handle and tweet (32 characters remaining)